search for: bitflip

> After the above, it's no longer crashing, and my email client's "pending operations" have > cleared. Does your server use ECC memory and if so, are there any errors logged (bitflip, ...)? Best regards, Gerald

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 04:33:38PM +0100, Gerald Galster wrote: > > After the above, it's no longer crashing, and my email client's "pending operations" have > > cleared. > > Does your server use ECC memory and if so, are there any errors logged (bitflip, ...)? > > Best regards, > Gerald I don't have the logs from that time them nor do I see any hardware / memory errors. I also haven't had any other odd failures. But how can I tell if I have ECC memory or not? -- Patrick

...; here is the result. > > file-1, file-2 marked as bad by scrub and file-3 is healthy. > > file-1 sha256 and bitrot signature value matches but still it's been > marked as bad. > > file-2 sha256 and bitrot signature value don't match, could be a victim of > bitrot or bitflip.file is still readable without any issue and no errors > found in the drive. > > file-3 sha256 and bitrot signature matches and healthy. > > > file-1 output from > > "sha256sum" = "71eada9352b1352aaef0f806d3d561 > 768ce2df905ded1668f665e06eca2d0bd4" &g...

...l in Linux to manually get file hash. here is the result. file-1, file-2 marked as bad by scrub and file-3 is healthy. file-1 sha256 and bitrot signature value matches but still it's been marked as bad. file-2 sha256 and bitrot signature value don't match, could be a victim of bitrot or bitflip.file is still readable without any issue and no errors found in the drive. file-3 sha256 and bitrot signature matches and healthy. file-1 output from "sha256sum" = "71eada9352b1352aaef0f806d3d561768ce2df905ded1668f665e06eca2d0bd4" "getfattr -m. -e hex -d " # file...

Hi, I have a file in my brick which was signed by bitrot and latter when running scrub it was marked as bad. Now, I want to verify file again manually. just to clarify my doubt how can I do this? regards Amudhan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170921/f69ff7be/attachment.html>

...arked as bad by scrub and file-3 is healthy. >>> >>> file-1 sha256 and bitrot signature value matches but still it's been >>> marked as bad. >>> >>> file-2 sha256 and bitrot signature value don't match, could be a victim >>> of bitrot or bitflip.file is still readable without any issue and no errors >>> found in the drive. >>> >>> file-3 sha256 and bitrot signature matches and healthy. >>> >>> >>> file-1 output from >>> >>> "sha256sum" = "71eada9352b1352...

...gt;> file-1, file-2 marked as bad by scrub and file-3 is healthy. >> >> file-1 sha256 and bitrot signature value matches but still it's been >> marked as bad. >> >> file-2 sha256 and bitrot signature value don't match, could be a victim >> of bitrot or bitflip.file is still readable without any issue and no errors >> found in the drive. >> >> file-3 sha256 and bitrot signature matches and healthy. >> >> >> file-1 output from >> >> "sha256sum" = "71eada9352b1352aaef0f806d3d56 >> 1768ce2d...

Hi folks, Normally people ask "when is CentOS 4.7 coming" and they are told "when it is ready". Dag posted on his blog about it going to testing in July while it was supposed to be syncing to the mirrors on Sept 5/6th according to Karanbir. Is there something going on behind the scenes? I have not seen Johnny Hughes or even Dag posting on this list for some time. CentOS

I?ve spend a few hours reading through the forums and wiki and honestly my head is spinning. I have been trying to study up on either buying or building a box that would allow me to add drives of varying sizes/speeds/brands (adding more later etc) and still be able to use the full space of drives (minus parity? [not sure if I got the terminology right]) with redundancy. I have found the ?all in

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 11:01:35AM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On 12. Mar 2023, at 20.17, Patrick Mansfield <patmans at yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Mar 12 10:32:27 goffin dovecot[8269]: imap(patman)<8452><r+ynYLf2PrDAqAEE>: Panic: file istream-header-filter.c: line 663 (i_stream_header_filter_snapshot_free): assertion failed:

...;>>>> >>>>> file-1 sha256 and bitrot signature value matches but still it's been >>>>> marked as bad. >>>>> >>>>> file-2 sha256 and bitrot signature value don't match, could be a >>>>> victim of bitrot or bitflip.file is still readable without any issue and no >>>>> errors found in the drive. >>>>> >>>>> file-3 sha256 and bitrot signature matches and healthy. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> file-1 output from >>>>> &g...

Hello everyone, I am trying to take ZFS snapshots (ie. zfs send) and burn them to DVD''s for offsite storage. In many cases, the snapshots greatly exceed the 8GB I can stuff onto a single DVD-DL. In order to make this work, I have used the "split" utility to break the images into smaller, fixed-size chunks that will fit onto a DVD. For example: #split -b8100m

After having read this mailing list for a little while, I get the impression that there are at least some people who regularly experience on-disk corruption that ZFS should be able to report and handle. I?ve been running a raidz1 on three 1TB consumer disks for approx. 2 years now (about 90% full), and I scrub the pool every 3-4 weeks and have never had a single error. From the oft-quoted 10^14

Hi, Jan On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Jan Kara <jack at suse.cz> wrote: > Hi! > > On Wed 27-07-16 15:58:55, Zhangfei Gao wrote: >> Hi, Michael >> >> I have met ext4 error when using vhost_scsi on arm64 platform, and >> suspect it is vhost_scsi issue. >> >> Ext4 error when testing virtio_scsi & vhost_scsi >> >> >> No

Hi, Jan On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Jan Kara <jack at suse.cz> wrote: > Hi! > > On Wed 27-07-16 15:58:55, Zhangfei Gao wrote: >> Hi, Michael >> >> I have met ext4 error when using vhost_scsi on arm64 platform, and >> suspect it is vhost_scsi issue. >> >> Ext4 error when testing virtio_scsi & vhost_scsi >> >> >> No

Should I file an RFE for this addition to ZFS? The concept would be to run ZFS on a file server, exporting storage to an application server where ZFS also runs on top of that storage. All storage management would take place on the file server, where the physical disks reside. The application server would still perform end-to-end error checking but would notify the file server when it detected

Hi All, Its been a while since I touched zfs. Is the below still the case with zfs and hardware raid array? Do we still need to provide two luns from the hardware raid then zfs mirror those two luns? http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#hardwareraid Thanks, Shawn -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

...D: <6EEA47532CD0D611887500B0D04943453FB8E5 at TFSMDMSG7> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi, I primarily use Splus for analysing TCP/IP traffic at the packet level. Several years ago, I hacked together functions using the .C call for bit operations: bitAnd, bitOr, bitFlip, bitShiftL, bitShiftR, bitXor and crc(char). Are there any more standard alternatives for these? If not, and, if any there is any interest, I would be happy to help package what I have for distribution. Additionally, I would interested in hearing offline from anyone using R/Splus communicatio...

Not sure if it''s been posted yet, my email is currently down... http://weblog.infoworld.com/yager/archives/2007/10/suns_zfs_is_clo.html Interesting piece. This is the second post from Yager that shows solaris in a pretty good light. I particularly like his closing comment: "If you haven''t checked out ZFS yet, do, because it will eventually become ubiquitously implemented